This is a post that sums up the kind of media sexism women have had to grapple with and the long terms effects it may have on today’s youth:

Gary Kamiya’s article in Salon was graced by that picture of Palin. That picture of Hillary is from Spy Magazine, circa February 1993, just a month after she and Bill arrived in Washington.

The post concludes:

This is why we fight. We fight for my daughter and the millions of girls like her who are endangered by the sexist rhetoric that passes for media these days. We fight for the millions of boys who are looking at the Progressive Dude Nation right now, at their style, their pazzazz, their irreverence, and who are wanting to posture the same stance one day if they haven’t adopted it already. There is more at stake than just this year, this election, or the next four years. There are legions of young minds being shaped, and we must inform them, using rhetoric that is natural to their intellect, of what is going on right now and what is possible for the future.

The most amusing thing to watch following the Palin speech last night was the journalists pretending not to know why on earth Sarah Palin would be so critical of them. She definitely landed a punch with her criticism. Roger Simon shot back with a sarcastic, dare I say “shrill,” column listing the reasons the media does not owe Palin an apology. My answer to Simon’s silliness is to tell him that Republicans have no problem with the media asking questions. We would love to see the media ask all kinds of questions, not just of our candidates though. There are hundreds of questions that have not been asked of Barack Obama, but the media had plenty of time to go around in search of DNA samples.

Sarah Palin found some unlikely allies Wednesday as leading academics and even former top aides to Hillary Rodham Clinton endorsed the Republican charge that John McCain’s running mate has been subject to a sexist double standard by the news media and Democrats.

Georgetown University professor Deborah Tannen, who has written best-selling books on gender differences, said she agrees with complaints that Palin skeptics – including prominent voices in the news media – have crossed a line by speculating about whether the Alaska governor is neglecting her family in pursuit of national office.

“What we’re dealing with now, there’s nothing subtle about it,” said Tannen. “We’re dealing with the assumption that child-rearing is the job of women and not men. Is it sexist? Yes.”

Among the eyebrow-raising comments in recent days:

• Democrat Joe Biden, in what he intended as self-deprecating remark, observed, “There’s a gigantic difference between John McCain and Barack Obama and between me and I suspect my vice presidential opponent. … She’s good looking.”

• Liberal radio host Ed Schultz used the words “bimbo alert” to refer to Palin, and the Huffington Post featured a photo montage of Palin with the headline, “Former Beauty Queen, Future VP?”

• CNN’s John Roberts recently pondered on air: “Children with Down’s syndrome require an awful lot of attention. The role of vice president, it seems to me, would take up an awful lot of her time, and it raises the issue of how much time will she have to dedicate to her newborn child?”

“There’s no way those questions would be asked of a male candidate,” said Howard Wolfson a former top strategist for Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Barbara Risman, a leader of the Council on Contemporary Families and a sociology professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said she hoped that Palin and the uproar over her coverage would prove itself to be a cultural milestone: “I think it’s really important, from this day forward, that we all ask about every candidate’s work life and home life. It’s sexism otherwise. … We have to be careful not to ask her questions that we wouldn’t ask a male candidate.”